The King and the God 2017
The king and the god (rēḱs deiwos-kʷe) is a story written in the reconstructed Proto Indo European language. It is loosely based on the "king Harishcandra" episode of (7.14 … 33.2). S. K. Sen asked a number of (Y. E. Arbeitman, , , , ) to reconstruct the PIE "parent" of the text. The version made in 2013 demonstrates just how typologically unsound ''this reconstructed mother tongue truly is. Here is the text itself. H₃rḗḱs dei̯u̯ós-kwe : H₃rḗḱs h₁est; só n̥putlós. H₃rḗḱs súhnum u̯l̥nh₁to. Tósi̯o ǵʰéu̯torm̥ prēḱst: "Súhnus moi̯ ǵn̥h₁i̯etōd!" Ǵʰéu̯tōr tom h₃rḗǵm̥ u̯eu̯ked: "h₁i̯áǵesu̯o dei̯u̯óm U̯érunom". Úpo h₃rḗḱs dei̯u̯óm U̯érunom sesole nú dei̯u̯óm h₁i̯aǵeto. "ḱludʰí moi̯, pter U̯erune!" Dei̯u̯ós U̯érunos diu̯és km̥tá gʷah₂t. "Kʷíd u̯ēlh₁si?" "Súhnum u̯ēlh₁mi." "Tód h₁estu", u̯éu̯ked leu̯kós dei̯u̯ós U̯érunos. Nu h₃réḱs pótnih₂ súhnum ǵeǵonh₁e. English translation: : Once there was a king. He was childless. The king wanted a son. He asked his priest: "May a son be born to me!" The priest said to the king: "Pray to the god Werunos." The king approached the god Werunos to pray now to the god. "Hear me, father Werunos!" The god Werunos came down from heaven. "What do you want?" "I want a son." "Let this be so," said the bright god Werunos. The king's lady bore a son. :: :: :: It really doesn't matter whether your a supporter of the Glottalic Theory, one velar series, or three, there is still the same problem to face. In all the versions of PIE, virtually no open front unrounded vowel can be found, except in potentially borrowed words like bʰardʰeh₂, and nursery words (mama). Not even schwa is assumed, which has been replaced by the monstrous vocalic laryngeal. Some have gone so far as to assume that even the o came from an original e. Just imagine that for one moment. If you cannot, this should help you. :: This is what might've PIE looked like (at an earlier stage) according to this radical E monovocalism. Going by Kortlandt, the e was pronounced æ as in 'c'a't'. See http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art269e.pdf for more information. ʕʷrḗḱs dei̯u̯ós-kwe ::: ʕʷrǽks ʔæst; sǽ n̥putlǽs. ʕʷrǽks súhnum wl̥nʔtu. Tǽsju gʰǽwtærm̥ prækst: "Súhnus muj gn̥ʔjætæd!" Gʰǽwtær tum ʕʷrǽgm̥ wæwkæd: "ʔjǽgæswu dæjwǽm Wǽrunæm". Úpu ʕʷrǽks dæjwǽm Wǽrunæm sæsælæ nú dæjwǽm ʔjægætu. "kludʰí muj, pħtær Wærunæ!" Dæjwǽs Wǽrunæs diwǽs km̥tǽ gʷæħt. "Kʷíd wælhsi?" "Súhnum wælhmi." "Tǽd ʔæstu", wǽwkæd læwkǽs dæjwǽs U̯ǽrunæs. Nu ʕʷrǽḱs pǽtniħ súhnum gægænʔæ. ::: ::: All the o's assumed for PIE either came from u or æ in this absurd theory. I dont object against this theory just because it ''looks weird, I object on the grounds that the vowel æ, or e, is not as common a sound as simple a. ::: More curious is why the word for mother is reconstructed as ''méh₂tēr ''https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/m%C3%A9h%E2%82%82t%C4%93r, something you'll ever hear a child say. Have western linguists gone so far as to postulate laryngeals for words like ''mother ''too? If not as if the Indo-European children of six thousand years ago grew up saying Mehmeh. ::: Its about time that linguists start paying attention to typology and treating PIE as a natural, human language, since it was one after all.